Wednesday, August 27, 2014

On Monday, August 11, 2014 iconic actor and comedian
Robin Williams was found dead at his Tiburon California home as a result of
suicide. While the star’s death came as a shock to family, friends, and fans
alike, it would be a far greater tribute to Williams’ life to celebrate the
positive impact that his work had, rather than focus upon the emerging details
of his death. Throughout his career, Robin Williams endeared himself to fans of
both comedy and drama through his by turns hilarious, wise, and always likable
on-screen persona. In one of his greatest hits, Williams combined his range of
acting skills to create a performance that struck the ideal balance between
entertainment and emotion to create a truly enlightening and engaging character;
the 1997 coming of age drama Good Will
Hunting.

The story begins with long time delinquent and unrecognized
math genius Will Hunting (Matt Damon) working as a janitor at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. After self-assured math professor Gerald Lambeau
(Stellan Skarsgard) poses a difficult problem for his class at MIT to solve, he
is stunned when the problem is mysteriously solved on the board the next day
and none of his students claim credit. In order to challenge the unknown math
scholar, Lambeau follows up the original problem with an even more complex and
difficult problem that he is sure will go unanswered. To his astonishment
,however, Lambeau discovers Will solving the problem during his janitorial shift
that night. Rather than take credit for his accomplishment, Will flees when
spotted for fear that Lambeau will report him for taking time out of his shift
to solve the problem. That night, Will meets medical student Skylar (Minnie
Driver), and gets her phone number only to later be arrested for participating
in a bar fight. Rather than serve time, however, Will is given the
opportunity of a lifetime when Lambeau makes a deal with the police to exchange
Will’s jail sentence for time spent studying mathematics under his supervision
and receiving psychiatric treatment.Unfortunately
for Lambeau, Will is no simple case and the host of therapists he hires to
treat the young genius quit one by one until Lambeau is finally forced to
consult his former roommate and estranged friend, Sean Maguire (Robin
Williams). Through Sean’s guidance, and his budding relationship with Skylar,
Will ultimately realizes that there’s no accomplishment without adversity, as he
finally gains the courage to face his demons and chase the dreams he finally
has the courage to dare to dream.

A genius in his natural habitat; a dive-bar

One of the most interesting aspects of this film is
the collaborative process that brought about its creation. Originally started as
part of a college assignment, the script was the brainchild of friends Matt
Damon and Ben Affleck, who later co-starred in the final film. After receiving
critiques from directors Rob Reiner and William Goldman, the pair obtained a
contract with Miramax through the influence of their friend, director/writer
Kevin Smith. Even after completion of the film’s script, the cast continued to
improvise, and alter the script's content. Many of the film’s most memorable moments including
Sean’s tale of his wife passing gas in her sleep and his closing reaction to
Will’s goodbye note, as well as the majority of Casey Affleck’s lines were improvised
during shooting. While improvisation can be a risky tactic, it clearly paid off
in this instance, as the lines bring a sense of spontaneity and authenticity to the otherwise
carefully measured story. Similarly, the personal nature of the project raised
the stakes for both Damon and Affleck in a way that released a passion and
skill from both actors that made the film the crowning achievement of both
their careers.

While the film features an excellent script and
cast, its greatest asset is Williams’ mesmerizing performance. Although he had
previously played the familiar archetype of inspirational teacher in Dead Poets Society, Williams takes the mentor
motif into refreshingly unfamiliar territory in his portrayal of Sean. Rather
than analyzing Will with endless questions like the other psychiatrists who
attempt to treat him, Sean instead stands up to Will’s defiance and tells his
own story. While unconventional, this method allows Sean to earn Will's trust and learn
about Will through an interactive experience rather than through the
predictable answers of a controlled interview. Perhaps even more notably, this
structure enables Williams to use his full range of acting skills as Sean
reveals the heartfelt tale of how he met his wife, the pain of losing her to
cancer, his childhood abuse, and the reasons that he wants to teach at a
community college even though he certainly doesn’t have to. These revelations
also reveal Sean to be a multi-faceted man who has strengths and faults that
make him entirely human and more relatable than the almost saintly Mr. Keating
of Dead Poets Society. This
complexity in turn makes Sean a more difficult character to play as Williams is
called upon to alternate between the wounded widower, wise teacher, and
challenging psychiatrist that make up Sean’s three dimensional character. In
each of his scenes, Williams is dynamic, engaging, and entirely believable
whether discussing his character’s past or offering powerful insight into
Will’s present and future. Through the subtlety and energy that he brings to
the role, Williams steals the film from star and co-writer Matt Damon, and
brings an added layer of depth to already intelligent script, making Good Will Hunting a true coming of age
classic.

Just one day after the news of Robin Williams’ death
was released to the public, an impromptu memorial was created for him at the
bench on Boston Common where Sean experiences his first breakthrough in his
relationship with Will. This memorial features memorable lines from the actor’s
films handwritten by fans, as well as memorabilia and flowers. The outpouring
from fans speaks volumes about the influence of both Good Will Hunting and Robin Williams upon the lives of countless
fans, and illustrates the enduring power of the actor’s work far better than any
article or review ever could. Now, we can only hope that Robin Williams has attained the
peace he was unable to find in life and appreciate the body of work he left
behind in which he inspired us to reach beyond our limits, seize the day, and
make our lives extraordinary.

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Confessions of a Film Junkie: 5 Underrated Actors &
Actresses to be on the look for.

By: Brian Cotnoir

We as humans have
fascinations and obsessions with celebrities.Deep down everyone hopes someday that they will have the chance to meet
one of their favorite celebrities; whether it’s to get an autograph, a picture,
share drink, or to be intimate with.Names
like Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise, Kate Winslett, Jennifer Lawrence, Samuel L.
Jackson, Jennifer Aniston, and Halle Berry are actors and actresses, where if
you just mention their name everyone knows who they are, and can name at least
one film that they’ve appeared in.However, those stars typically in big budget A-List films.Not every person who appears in a film goes
on to have a long and illustrious career, however, there are some that have
leave quite an impact and could very well go on to be the next biggest star in
Hollywood.So today I am listing 5
Underrated Actors & Actresses to be on the look for, so be sure to keep an
eye out in film and television for these guys and gals.I will be listing them in no particular
order.

1.) Joseph Gilgun

Joseph Gilgun is a
young British actor who is probably known most famously as playing the caring
sympathetic skinhead Woody in the 2006 Independent Drama “This is England”.He also
played a psychotic drug dealer in the 2009 film “Harry Brown” alongside acting legend
Michael Caine. Gilgun is also known for his television work in his native Great
Britain, where he played the character Rudy Wade in the British version of “Misfits”.As for American works, he is probably best
recognized from his role in Luc Besson’s Sci-Fi/Action/Thriller “Lockout” where
he played the neurotic and psychotic antagonist Hydell.Giglun has a wide range as an actor and can
play anything from funny and caring to scary and dangerous.He also has perhaps the coolest accent ever;
he sounds like a Scotsman trying to do a Cockney accent.

Joseph Gilgun in "Lockout"

Joseph Gilgun in "This is England"

2.) Melaine Leishman

Melanie Leishman is a
Canadian Actress who is sure to be one of the most underrated young actresses
in film and television today.Leishman,
is known for playing the nerdy and titular character Hannah on the Canadian
cult favorite television show “Todd &
the Book of Pure Evil” where she acted alongside beloved stoner comedian
Jay Mewes.More recently, Leishman
appeared in the 2014 Slasher-Musical, “Stage
Fright” acting alongside actress Allie MacDonald and rock superstar
Meatloaf.In addition to acting, Melanie
Leishman also has a wonderful singing voice.She is definitely a young up and coming actress to keep an eye out for.

3.) Noah Segan

I’ve bashed Noah Segan
on this blog before.However, I’ve grown
to enjoy and even like him as an actor.I first started enjoying Segan as an actor after seeing him portray
drummer Don Bolles in the film “What we
Do is Secret”, a biopic on Punk Rock pioneers The Germs.Where he really won me over was his role in
the film “Someone’s Knocking at the Door”
(which he also was a co-producer on).Looking back, he wasn’t as bad as I remembered in “Deadgirl”, though his character is still pretty deplorable.He tends to specialize in Horror/Thriller roles;
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Segan play a role in a Horror film that gets a
nationwide release.Oh, and a Fun Fact:
when Segan was a kid he was the voice of the cartoon character Henry on the
Nickelodeon show “KaBlam!”.

I’ve reviewed two
films that actress Danielle De Luca has appeared in: “Naked Fear” and “Necrosis:
Blood Snow”.I bashed both films for
being unoriginal and unprofessional.However, I made it valid that I don’t think Danielle De Luca is bad
actress, but the films she appears in typically are—which is a shame—because
she is a good actress, but she unfortunately appears mostly in terrible
low-budget Horror films.I wish there
were some film studio out there that would give her a chance to show off her
acting talent.

He made is big debut
alongside Philip Seymour Hoffman in “Almost
Famous”.Actor Patrick Fugit is definitely
another Underrated actor in films.Fugit
is probably known best for playing the role of Zia in the 2008 Independent
favorite “Wristcutters: A Love Story”,
and also played the Lizard boy in the “Cirque
du Freak: The Vampires Assistant”. Fugit may not be as well-known as other
stars, but his work in Independent films, like “Wristcutters” truly showcase his talents as an actor.

On
Tuesday, August 12, 2014 1940’s actress and icon Lauren Bacall died at age
eighty-nine. Over the course of her versatile career Bacall acted in over
seventy movies, starred in four Broadway plays, modeled in numerous fashion
magazines, and was awarded both two Tony Awards and an honorary Lifetime
Achievement Oscar. Today, she is best remembered for the smoky voice and no
nonsense attitude that made her a symbol of the resilient American woman of
the World War II era. Bacall first burst onto the scene in her star-making role
as an equal parts seductive and savvy con artist in the 1944 drama To Have and Have Not opposite her soon
to be husband Humphrey Bogart. Following both the success of that film and the
co-stars burgeoning romance, Warner Brothers decided to capitalize upon the
pair’s chemistry and cast them in three more films. One of the most notable of
Bacall and Bogart’s films was the 1946 crime classic The Big Sleep; in honor of Bacall’s life and career, I’ll be
reviewing this film which features herat her most sharp, slick, and of
course sultry.

The
story begins with private detective Philip Marlowe (Humphrey Bogart) taking a
job for the once formidable, but now retired and sickly General Sternwood
(Charles Waldron). Sternwood asks Marlowe to track down a blackmailer who has
been harassing his youngest daughter, Carmen (Martha Vickers), for gambling
debts that he claims she owes. While the general is aware of his daughter’s
fondness for playing high stakes, he also suspects that there is something far
more substantial and sinister behind the extortion, and hopes that Marlowe can
get to the bottom of it. What neither the general nor Marlowe count on,
however, is the turn that the case takes when the general’s older daughter, smart-talking
divorcee Vivian (Lauren Bacall), takes an interest in both the case and the
detective working it. As he follows the blackmailer’s trail, Marlowe finds
himself in the midst of a larger conspiracy that involves four murders, a local
pornography ring, a casino managing gangster, and the disappearance of the
general’s former gun runner protégée. Even in the middle of all the crosses,
double-crosses, and revelations that make up the story’s notoriously complex plot,
the real action lies in the sizzling scenes featuring Bogart and Bacall as
their characters match wits and cigarettes in the true noir fashion.

The Big Sleep contains one of
the most fascinating and ultimately dumbfounding plots in the famously
confounding genre of film noir. While the story begins with Marlowe tracking
pornographer and blackmailer Arthur Geiger, it soon spirals into a series of
murders, betrayals, and secrets that reportedly left screenwriters William
Faulkner, Leigh Brackett, and Jules Furthmann so dismayed that they had to
contact the original novel's author, Raymond Chandler ,to determine who killed the Sternwood’s chauffer.
The punch-line of the story is that when Chandler tried to answer the
screenwriters’ question, even he was unable to solve the mystery. Despite its
muddled plot, however, the film engages audiences through its combination of
sinister atmosphere, razor-sharp dialogue, and hard-boiled action. Over the
course of the film’s running time, viewers can’t help but be caught up in the
danger, despair, and excitement that make up Marlowe’s Los Angeles. One of the
greatest assets of the film is its writing, which brought Chandler’s complex
tale of lust and greed to life in a way that adhered to its risqué source
material but still satisfied the Hay’s Code censors. Despite the notorious difficulties
that the censors created for filmmakers at this time, the film is in many ways
the better for the censors' restrictions, as the main players’ many vices remain fittingly
shrouded in mystery and any depravity that the characters participate in is
left up to the vividness of viewers’ imaginations, creating an atmosphere ripe
with possibilities. The film also showcases some of the most clever and sexy
dialogue in all of cinema, with Bogart and Bacall exchanging some of the
spiciest double-entendres since Mae West. With a script that is by turns menacing,
sensual, enigmatic, clever, and always morally ambiguous, The Big Sleep is a must see for fans of film noir.

Who would have thought 1946 was so kinky?!

Fortunately
for the film’s makers, the talented cast creates such engaging performances that
the details of the intricate plot quickly become a secondary concern. Humphrey
Bogart creates a truly dynamic character in Philip Marlowe by merging his
beloved romantic loner persona of such films as Casablanca
and To Have and Have Not with the
street-wise and hard hitting hoods he began his career playing. Similarly,
Lauren Bacall follows-up her star making turn in To Have and Have Not with a similarly witty and tough, but far more dangerous
and cunning heroine as Vivian. Martha Vickers
provides a stand-out performance in her role as the drug and sex addicted
Carmen, capturing both Carmen’s adult wantonness and childlike immaturity with
equal skill. The film’s supporting cast all keep the action moving with a series
of striking performances in diverse parts that successfully transport viewers
to the seamy underworld of post-war Los Angeles.

The Big Sleep is just one of
the many films in which Lauren Bacall brought a winning combination of intelligence, depth, and sex appeal to a role
that, if portrayed by another actress, could have been just one more in a long line of
one dimensional parts. In Bacall’s capable hands, however, Vivian is a
strong, savvy, and independent woman who proves to be just as, if not more, complex than the conspiracy surrounding her family. As movie fans mourn Lauren
Bacall’s passing, we can take comfort in viewing her films, which remain just
as startlingly fresh and modern today as they appeared to audiences upon their
original release. If there is a heaven, I imagine that Bacall is there reunited
with Bogart, and that together they are setting the heavens aglow with the same
sparks that first endeared them to audiences seventy years ago.

Still the sexiest couple on screen, and they got to keep their clothes on!

IF YOU ENJOYED MARLOWE'S SLEUTHING DON'T MISS MY MURDER MYSTERY ALL IN THE PAST http://offthewallplays.com/2014/11/19/past-murder-mystery-play-scripts/

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Remakes
are one of the most controversial topics in film, and are often credited with
causing the current decline in Hollywood’s sales and output. Despite what
public outcry would suggest, however, remakes are far from a new invention, and have in fact been a popular trend since films transitioned to sound. This week
I’ll be reviewing two versions of the same story that were released relatively
close together; the 1931 and 1940 versions of the classic tearjerker Waterloo Bridge. While both films follow
the same general plot of the Broadway show that they were based upon, each tells the
tragic tale of love found and lost with its own unique twist. Both films were
considered commercial and critical successes upon their release, but the
question remains, did the remake outdo the original, or should Hollywood have
left this story alone?

A right sassy couple

1.FAITHFULNESS:
Although both films follow the general plot of Robert E. Sherwood’s original
stage play, the 1940 version does include some significant deviations from the
original story. The basic plot in both films begins with Roy serving as a
soldier in England during World War I where he meets the love of his life,
Myra, during an air raid. The story then follows the couple as they embark upon
a whirlwind romance, only to have fate tragically separate them once again. The
greatest changes between the two are due to the time in which the remake was
made. Because the remake was released at the start of World War II, this
version was able to include a framing flashback set during World War II in
which Roy looks back upon his
experiences as a young soldier in World War I. While this framing device takes
up little of the film’s running time and has no bearing upon the story’s
central events, it provides an added connection between the fictional story and
the very real horrors of the early twentieth century that inspired it. Through
this simple addition, the 1940 release is told within the context of the
greater history in which it was produced and poignantly highlights the way in
which history can sweep into and irreparably alter people’s lives. The 1940 release
of the remake also subjected the script to the restrictions of the Hay’s Code
censors, which forced the film’s makers to soften the script’s original gritty
content. In the 1931 version, Myra is a poverty stricken chorus girl turned prostitute
who meets Roy with the intention of picking him up at Waterloo Bridge as a
customer, while in the 1940 version she is changed to a ballet dancer who only
resorts to prostitution after a series of hardships that bring her to the brink
of starvation. This effort to sanitize its leading lady forced the film’s writers
to alter the rest of the 1940 film’s plot accordingly, leading to changes in
Roy and Myra’s initial meeting and romance, and her tragic end. Because it
would be another three years before the Hay’s Code would be put into
effect, the 1931 film was free to retain the original realism of the play and
dared to treat its leading lady as a character worthy of dignity and love
despite her dubious profession. Through its faithful adaptation of a risqué
story, the 1931 film wins points for telling Sherwood’s story in a way that
conveyed the harsh reality of the war-time experiences that first inspired him
to write it.

As God is my witness I'll never turn tricks again

2.TRAGIC
IMPACT: While the drastic changes to Myra’s back story arguably soften the film’s
realism, these changes also provide the tragic events of its plot with a
greater emotional impact. The 1931 film approaches Myra’s descent into
prostitution in a matter of fact manner that highlights her economic
motivations, which in turn reflects the predicament of countless women in her
situation throughout the ages. In the 1940 film, however, Myra begins the film
as a bright, if naïve, girl with an even brighter future ahead of her in the
London ballet. While Myra is still driven by financial need in the remake, it
is only after she loses both her career and any hope of seeing Roy again that
she begins the downward spiral that ultimately leaves her with no other choice
but to starve or make ends meet on London’s streets. This added insight into
who Myra is before she meets Roy endears her to audiences early in the film and
raises the stakes of her struggle in a way that makes her fall from grace all
the more devastating. By showing Myra’s promising start, the writers also provided
a greater internal conflict for her to face when she first enters prostitution and
adds a greater context to the self-loathing that she feels when she reunites with Roy
and finally gives him up. Similarly, the decision to change Myra’s
death from her being killed in a bombing to committing suicide makes her death
even more tragic, as it removes any possibility that her death was a mere
accident of fate. This in turn makes her
death the logical end to the chain of tragic events that mark Myra and Roy’s war-time
love story. The added depth that the 1940 remake imbues Myra’s story with makes
her a truly complex leading lady and ensures that her story is worth every tear it
brings to the eyes of its viewers.

Young love in the days before PETA

3.STAR
QUALITY: Although both films contain fine acting, the acting styles of the
early sound era and Hollywood’s Golden Age were drastically different, creating
a distinct variation between the two films. Mae Clark is completely believable
as the hard as nails Myra, but still imbues her performance with just the right
level of charm and vulnerability for audiences to understand what draws naïve Roy
towards her. Douglass Montgomery’s lack of acting experience allows him to
portray Roy’s lack of life experience in a way that is convincing, but borders
on being over the top. The film’s weak writing combined with Montgomery’s unsure
performance makes Roy seem so innocent that he makes for an unlikely leading man
and an odd match for the street-smart Myra. By contrast, Robert Taylor portrays
Roy as an aware but entirely decent man, which lends credibility to both his
character’s experiences on the battlefield and unwillingness to see through the
change in Myra upon his return. Vivien Leigh brings her usual nuance and charm
to her role as Myra and plays both Myra’s initial innocence and later disillusionment
with equal skill, making Myra’s descent an involving and tragic journey for
audiences. Regardless of Clark and Montgomery’s skills as actors, the stagy acting
style and wordy script of the 1931 version makes the film come across more as a
filmed play than an actual film, which in turn makes it difficult for audiences
to become fully invested in the story. Through its polished performances and
modern acting style the 1940 version bests its predecessor in the acting
department, bringing the remake the title of top tearjerker. Please provide
your vote in the comments!

Oh No, I’m going to
talk about “Sleeping Beauty” again,
aaahhhhhhh!!!!!!!!Well actually, this
time I’m not talking about the 2011 Australian version of “Sleeping Beauty” that stars my porcelain skinned goddess, Emily
Browning.No, I’m talking about the 2014
version released by Mock-Buster Kings “The Asylum”, the same studio responsible
for classics like “Sharknado” and “Titanic II”.So in an attempt to capitalize on Disney’s “Maleficent” they produced this...film?Now just to clarify this: there have been two
films this year released under the title “Sleeping
Beauty” and the one I am reviewing is the version made by “The Asylum”.

So the plot starts out following the original Grimm fairytale:
a king and queen celebrating the first birthday of their daughter, an evil
witch (in this version she’s named Tambria) shows up and is furious that she
wasn’t invited so she casts a spell on the child and her family proclaiming
that on her 16th birthday she shall prick her finger on a spinning
wheel and fall into a forever sleep when the Princess (named Dawn in this
version) pricks her finger on the spinning wheel.So the prophecy comes true and the whole
kingdom falls asleep and Tambria takes over.

One-hundred years later
we go to the Kingdom of Lipscomb, and see Prince Jayson and his whipping boy
Barrow.Jayson wants so desperately to
become King, but can’t until he settles marry’s a princess and has a
child.Barrow discovers a map telling of
a sleeping Princess trapped in a faraway kingdom that can’t be awoken until she
receives a kiss from her one true love.So Prince Jayson forces Barrow and a group of other men to go and get
the princess so Jayson can become a king.However, the task isn’t as easy as it seems as the land and waters are crawling
with monstrous beasts, undead soldiers, and other traps.Now it’s up to our group of heroes to not only rescue the princess,
but get out alive as well.

Our something resembling heroes, Ladies & Gents?

This
film is a mess.As if changing the
character’s names around wasn’t confusing enough to follow, they also had to go
ahead and change the plot around as well.The idea of zombies in the story of “Sleeping
Beauty” sounds like it’d be a good idea, but in all actuality it’s
not.And let me just say, I thought the “Sleeping Beauty” (2011) was a dull film,
but this one was so dull that I thought I was going to fall into a forever
sleep.It’s so boring! And don’t even get me started on the CGI.The CGI is crude and tacky even for The
Asylum’s standards.The CGI is so bad, I
would say it’s on the same level as the CGI in a Uwe Boll film, and that’s
freaking bad!

Looks like Uwe Boll's table scraps!

Now the characters in
this film are just as dull and generic as the plot.The film was directed by Casper Van Dien (you
know, the guy who played Brahm Bones in Tim Burton’s “Sleepy Hollow”?)Well he
took it upon himself to cast himself as King David in the film.Not only did he cast himself in the film, but
he cast his daughter Grace in the title role, and his other daughters Maya and
Celeste in small supporting roles.This
film feels less like “Sleeping Beauty”
and more like it probably should’ve been called “Casper Van Dien’s Family Reunion”!I understand that directors sometimes want to
cast their own kids in their films and there’s nothing wrong with that, but it
felt so forced in this one.I mean the
character his daughter Maya played, Newt, was completely useless to the
plot.I just think her father put her in
the film so she wouldn’t feel left out, but the addition of the character Newt,
throws off the plot so much.How is it
that these grown men, with formal combat training are constantly being
vanquished by Tambria and her supernatural creations and powers, and yet an
11-year-old peasant girl managed to not only make it onto the castle property
without being attacked, but has been living there for weeks without even being
noticed!I’m calling bullsh!t on that
one movie.None of the Van Dien children
give a standout performance in “Sleeping
Beauty”, so don’t expect to see them in any other films soon unless daddy
is directing or producing it.

The only character I actually kind of
liked in this film was Prince Jayson, who is played by actor Edward Lewis
French.Even though he is not the
protagonist of the film (if anything he’s an anti-hero) I still found his
performance to be good and enjoyable.He’s
rude, he’s obnoxious, he’s cocky, and yet I found myself enjoying his character
so much, and normally I despise characters with those traits.So yeah, props go to Edward Lewis French for
making me like an unlikable character.

Well this is the 3rd film I’ve
seen with the title “Sleeping Beauty”
and I have to say it’s the most boring one yet, but really would I expect
anything less from “The Asylum” film studios?The Asylum is known for putting around unoriginal low-budget crap, but I
still feel like this is pretty bad even for their standards.That’s right, I feel like the studio that
made a film about a tornado made of sharks, held this film to a lower standard
then their other works.There isn’t any
group or demographic of people, I could or would recommend this film too.The only way I could see anyone watching this
film is if they mistake this one for the other “Sleeping Beauty” film released this year. Trust me, you read this blog to know what
films to avoid, if I’m saying don’t see it then don’t see it.

Wednesday, August 6, 2014

It’s funny, how the
most minuet things can make you want to watch a film.Now, I’m the type of person who will watch a
film solely because it features one of my favorite actors or was made by one of
my favorite directors, even if I think the movie is going to be terrible.However, what made me want to check out the
film I’m watching today isn’t one of my favorite actors or directors, but
rather a very obscure musician who did the soundtrack for the film.In my review of “The Woman” I praised the soundtrack for the film, claiming that it
was one of my favorite parts of the film.The soundtrack was done by an obscure musician by the name of Sean
Spillane, when I was doing a search of the internet and saw that he also did
the music for another Horror film called “Jug
Face” I decided that I wanted to check it out as well.

“Jug Face” was a film released in 2013 and tells the story of a
backwoods community where the people pray to a mysterious pit in the woods that
apparently has mysterious healing powers and protects all those who pray to it.
However, the protection and healings come with a grave price.A member of the community named Dawai makes
jugs for the other members of the community to store and sell their moonshine
in.He is said to see visions and
creates jugs with the images of one of the communities residents on it.If a person becomes a “jug face” then they
have to be sacrificed to the pit.If the
person on the jug face is not sacrificed to the pit, then the pit will send out
in unknown creature to slaughter another one of the town’s residents.

Ada sucks as a protagonist

This is where we meet our main
character, Ada; a young girl who is in a sexually relationship with her brother
Jessaby.Ada has a lot of things going
against her early on in the film.She is
arranged to be married to another one of the community’s residents—a portly
country boy named Body—she is pregnant with her brothers baby, and struggles to
keep her pregnancy a secret, and she just learns that she is to be the next
sacrifice to the pit.Ada hides her jug
face in the woods, in hopes that it will go away, but people in the community
begin to turn up dead, including Ada’s best friend, her brother, her fiancée, and
her father.Ada is faced with a huge
moral dilemma, does she tell people that she was supposed to be the next jug
face and face her fate, or does she keep lying, hiding, and attempt to escape
the community to save herself and her unborn child?

Dawai & Ada chained to tree, about to be K-I-L-L-E-D

I found some of the aspects of “Jug Face” to be quite enjoyable.The opening credits sequence consists of these wonderful hand drawn illustrations
that are supposed to give you the gist of how “the pit” works and its origins,
it doesn’t explain everything with total clarity, but it was visually
appeasing.Now, normally I’m against the
“Evil Redneck or Hillbilly cliché” in a Horror film, but I think think the
actors in the film did a great job, not overdoing their characters.Now that I think of it, I wouldn’t consider any
character in this film to fall into that category.They are backwoods people, but they’re not
evil rednecks, they’re more like eccentric religious zealots, like the cult in “Silent Hill”.Now as for the music, I will be honest with you;
I felt it was very underwhelming. Sean
Spillane’s music and scores from “The
Woman” were great, they were catchy, they were memorable, and I honestly didn’t
find any of the songs or scores form “Jug
Face” to be on that same level.The
songs aren’t terrible, they just weren’t very memorable.

Now
let’s look at the characters.I feel
like Ada is a very week and unlikable character.Everything bad that happens in this community
is her fault, and she doesn’t want to own up to any of it.She’s made some mistakes and let things get
way too far out of hand, and almost never takes responsibility for it.So much death and destruction happens because
of her selfishness and, I just found her to be a weak and unlikable character.

Now the character Dawai I found to
very likable.He’s sort of the “town
prophet”.He’s a slow man, who is said
to have visions caused by the Pit and he makes jugs with the faces of the next
sacrifice the pit wants.What was most
amazing about Dawai is that I did not even recognize the actor who was playing
him.Dawai is played by actor Sean
Bridgers, who also played Chris Cleek in “The
Woman”.I bashed Bridgers acting in
that film and constantly referred to him as “Not Quite John C. Reilly”, but I didn’t
even recognize him in “Jug Face” and
found his role of Dawai to not only be good, but enjoyable too.

I found “Jug Face” to be a rather good film.Fun Fact about it: it was produced by Lucky McKee (Director of “May” and “The Woman”) which I think explains how people like Sean Spillane
and Sean Bridgers became a part of the film.I would describe this film as a low-budget version of “Minority Report” meets “Pumpkinhead”.I would recommend this film to people who are
fans of Lucky McKee’s works, you should definitely check out “Jug Face”, it’s a decent and enjoyable
low-budget horror film, if you ask me.

Biographies
are one of the most simple and celebrated genres in film. In a biography,
viewers can see an example of a person finding success, often against the odds,
with the comforting knowledge that the example is one founded in fact. Because
these films are based in reality, the emotions that they convey often affect
audiences in a way that is more profound than a fictionalized scenario could
accomplish. This accentuated emotion is only increased when such a film also
utilizes the power of song to tell its story. One such film is the 1968 musical
biography Funny Girl, which tells the
rags to riches story of vaudeville and radio star Fanny Brice, a woman whose
comedic talent, gumption, and perseverance made her an artist who was truly
ahead of her time.

The
story begins with comedic star Fanny Brice awaiting her husband’s return from a
two year prison sentence and depicts her reflecting upon the many ups and downs
that have brought her to this point in her life as she prepares for an upcoming
performance. Within minutes, the film launches into a flashback of a teenaged
Fanny setting out to audition at a local vaudeville show as a chorus girl
against the advice of her mother and friends. While her unconventional
looks and lack of dance experience hinder her success at the audition, her
stubborn persistence eventually wins her a spot in the line, and an improvised
performance cements her start as a stage success. While working as a chorus
girl, she makes a brief acquaintance with sophisticated gambler Nick Arnstein,
who provides her with both moral support and her first glimpse
of life beyond the confines of her vaudeville job and upbringing in the slums
of the lower east side. Fanny later reunites with Nick several years later
after her successful debut in the Ziegfeld Follies, and the two are on the
verge of beginning a romance when Nick leaves to participate in a high stakes
poker game on a ship bound for Europe. Heartbroken, Fanny throws herself into
her career only to meet Nick again one year later during one of her one night
engagements. Despite her best efforts to remain guarded, she and Nick finally
embark upon a romantic relationship and eventually marry. As time goes on,
however, Fanny’s career continues to flourish while Nick’s luck finally runs
out, forcing him into a secondary role in their relationship. Fanny’s efforts
to alleviate Nick’s despondence only cause the couple further trouble and
reiterate his dependence upon her, leading him to become involved in a bonds
scam that ultimately results in his imprisonment at the start of the film.

One
of the most effective aspects of Funny
Girl is its sense of realism. While many aspects of Fanny Brice’s life are
condensed or excluded in order to meet the film’s already lengthy running time,
the film excellently captures the struggles that she faced in her attempt to
balance her dual roles of wife and artist. Rather than limit the story’s focus
to Fanny’s rise, the film creates a truly three dimensional portrait of her
through its continuation into her later difficulties and persevering struggle
to pick up her life and begin again. Like many films, the script in Funny Girl,
does deviate from the facts of its protagonist’s story, including ignoring
Fanny’s first marriage and limiting Nick’s criminal activities to one moment of
desperation when in reality he had already served a prior sentence before their
marriage. Despite its inaccuracies, however, the film wisely focuses upon the
later struggles in Fanny’s career without trying to add more color to her early
life, even going so far as to include a scene in which teenage Fanny jokingly
says that she still hasn’t suffered enough to be a great artist. This lack of
sensationalism in the film’s first act allows the story to build until the
crisis in Fanny’s marriage that opens and closes the film, and makes the ensuing drama
more effective. Through its realistic, if not entirely accurate account of
Fanny Brice’s life and career, Funny Girltells a story that is both a sobering
account of marital strife and an inspiring tale of artistic and personal
triumph.

Hello gorgeous!

While
the script's songs and inspiring story are compelling, neither would have made a
successful transition to screen without an equally compelling cast. In her
debut role, Barbra Streisand captures the quirkiness, determination, and inner
strength that marked Fanny Brice’s life and career in a way that brings the
1920’s stage star to the modern screen. After viewing just one reel of Streisand’s
performance, it is little wonder that the film’s producer, Brice’s real life
son in law Ray Stark, refused to make the film unless Streisand reprised her
Broadway role. Omar Sharif also provides an exemplary performance as Brice’s
sophisticated love interest turned tormented husband, and perfectly portrays the
toll that life as “Mr. Fanny Brice” takes upon Nick’s self esteem. The supporting cast
round out the film with multi-faceted and scene stealing turns from Walter
Pidgeon as the outwardly stern but inwardly sentimental Florenz Ziegfeld, and Kay
Medford as Fanny’s equal parts good hearted and street smart mother. Through
the combined talents of its cast, the film continues to transport viewers to
the distant glories of New York’s theater scene at the turn of the century and
the all too near difficulties of family and romantic relationships that remain
as complex today as when Fanny and Nick lived through them.

Despite
its title, Funny Girl is worth
watching for more than just a laugh. Through its winning combination of song
and subject matter, the film successfully makes the individual story of a turn
of the century entertainer into a universal tale of an artist's struggle for
personal and professional success. The film’s excellent cast carries the story
and makes its historical content both accessible and relevant to modern
audiences. For a parade that cannot be
rained on, look no further than Barbra Streisand's Oscar winning film debut in Funny
Girl.